R.I., Conn. attorneys general expected to decide on Mass. nuptials

Attorneys general in Rhode Island and Connecticut are expected to release opinions today about whether same-sex marriages from Massachusetts should be recognized in their states, decisions that could intensify the controversy over the status of out-of-state gay couples seeking to wed here.

Some local officials in Massachusets believe that if Rhode Island or Connecticut decide to recognize gay couples married in the Bay State, more communities here will be emboldened to allow nonresidents to receive marriage licenses.

Provincetown, Somerville, and Worcester officials have already said that any same-sex couple, instate or out-of-state, would be eligible for a marriage license so long as the couple sign an oath attesting that they know of no legal impediment to marriage in their home state. The officials say they will not further scrutinize or screen the applicants.

‘‘We will take marriage licenses no matter where the couple resides,’’ said Worcester City Clerk David Rushford. ‘‘We are not the marriage police.’’

The move by the three communities is a defiant stand against Governor Mitt Romney whose admininstration has said that a 1913 law bars couples from marrying in Massachusetts if their home state would not recognize the marriage. The adminstration has said that no other state recognizes same-sex marriage thus same-sex couples from outside Massachusetts are barred from marrying here.

But officials in the dissenting municipalities note that the situation is in flux, with Connecticut and Rhode Island preparing to issue legal opinions. Meanwhile New York’s attorney general indicated last week that New York law requires the state to recognize marriages legally performed in other states, though Governor George Pataki disagrees.

With the legal questions surrounding gay marriage still unsettled, the town and city officials say, the burden of figuring out its contours should not fall to municipalities.

‘‘The town clerk should not be put in the position of having to make a legal determination of what others states say,’’ said John Giorgio, town counsel for Provincetown.

Still other communities said they remain committed to following the governor’s directive, Boston included.

‘‘Boston is allowing people to apply for a marriage certificate if they live in Massachusetts or intend to live in Massachusetts,’’ said Seth Gitell, a spokesman for Mayor Thomas M. Menino.

The variations in how communities are carrying out the policy sent couples spilling over the state border into Provincetown, Somerville, andWorcester yesterday.

Cody Rogahn and his partner, Jonathan Yarbrough, of Minnesota, who last year held a commitment ceremony in their home state and were married in Canada, will be the first couple to receive a certificate of intention to marry in Provincetown, having secured the first appointment at 8 a.m. They plan to marry tomorrow as well, at a private dockside location overlooking the harbor.

Rogahn, 55, a retired school superintendent, said he was aware that the marriage might not stand in Minnesota.

‘‘It’s an emotional thing, and eventually, maybe in 10 years, it will become legal,’’ Rogahn said.

In Rhode Island, gay rights advocates expressed hope that, based on his previous record, Attorney General Patrick C. Lynch’s opinion today will call for recognition of the Massachusetts marriages.

‘‘We have strong hopes that he is going to say that Rhode Island has always recognized Massachusetts marriages and therfore will continue to do so,’’ said Kate Monteiro, president of the Rhode Island Alliance for Lesbian and Gay Civil Rights. ‘‘That is not only our belief and interpretation of the law, it’s our expectation of this attorney general.’’

Advocates in Connecticut are looking to Attorney General Richard Blumenthal’s record, which they say as been liberal and supportive of their cause.

‘‘He has been a supporter of gay rights since the time he was in the Legislature,’’ said Anne Stanback, president of Love Makes A Family of Connecticut. Stanback said Blumenthal, as a state senator, voted for antidiscrimination and hate crimes legislation that included sexual orientation clauses.

Stanback said the law in Connecticut, which Blumental is charged with carrying out, is also on the side of gay marriage.

‘‘There’s nothing in Connecticut law that would preclude the state from recognizng those marriages,’’ she said.

Both attorneys general were expected to release statements this morning.